1) Police Accuse French Journalists Detained in Papua of Espionage

Jakarta. Police on Thursday say that two French journalists detained in Papua last week over visa violations are currently suspected of being involved in espionage activities.

“We have processed the case,” Papua Police chief Insp. Gen. Yotje Mende said. “The two suspects will still be processed because there is suspicion that they are involved in espionage, [not just] immigration violations.”

Yotje said the journalists, 40-year-old Thomas Charles Tendies and 29-year-old Valentine Burrot, were already guilty of immigration offense of conducting journalist activities using a tourist visa.

“It is obviously a breach of the law. We are cooperating with the district attorney’s office and immigration. Right now they are still being detained at the provincial police headquarters, and we will impose double charges against them — the general crime and the special immigration crime,” he said.

According to Yotje, the two had visited an area in the district of Wamena where a criminal group being hunt down by local police is allegedly based.

“When we arrested them in Wamena, they were in contact with Enden Wanimbo. They were having a discussion,” Yotje said, referring to a separatist group leader suspected of being behind the shooting of police officers in Lanny Jaya last July that resulted in two deaths and six injuries.

Police have also confiscated the journalists’ laptop and tried to recover data deleted by the pair when they were arrested, Yotje said.

“I’m not saying they are working for the separatist group, but we suspect they were involved in activities related to an armed criminal group,” he said.

Tendies and Burrot, who both work for Arte TV in France, were arrested by the police in a hotel in Wamena on Aug. 6 along with three members of the separatist group led by Enden.

Burrot, who has worked for the French embassy in Tel Aviv, Israel, is suspected to be a civil worker.

The improper implementation of policy and lack of attention to security-related problems in Papua are said to be the root causes of the ongoing separatist movements in the region.

Recent incidents in the province include the shooting of two police officers in Lanny Jaya by an armed civilian group led by Enden Wanimbo and the arrest of 21 civilians over their suspected affiliation with the separatist Free Papua Movement (OPM).

“Separatist movements are continuing their efforts in the region,” chairman of the Jayapura’s Fajar Timur School of Theology and Philosophy (STFT), Priest Neles Tebay, said on Tuesday.

He said actions representing separatism could manifest in different forms, ranging from shootings, flag raising to rallies.

He suggested that opposing parties should sit down together and resolve their differences. Unfortunately, this has not been done.

“The government tries to settle the problems in its own ways, using different approaches such as economic and legal, but these methods have failed to put a stop to or eliminate acts of insurgence. At the same time, the other side feels that the root of their real problems were never touched,” Neles said.

According to Neles, the root of the problems in Papua is the political status of the province. The government says the problem has been resolved but Papuans think otherwise, which is why acts of insurgence continue to take place.

Separately, chairperson of the Democratic Alliance for Papua (ALDP), Latifah Anum Siregar, said that acts of insurgence were not merely committed on account of ideology but also because of the interests of both the local elite and local politics.

Providing examples, Latifah said legislative or regional elections could eventually lead to the formation of separatist movements due to dissatisfied candidates and parties.

She added that no matter what Papuans did, including voicing their aspiration for freedom, their actions would be seen as acts of separatism.

According to Latifah, local administrations in Papua could put an end to acts of separatism by properly addressing the problems that trigger the acts.

In a related development, the Jayapura Police have named one of the 21 civilians arrested over the weekend for their alleged affiliation with OPM a suspect for illegal weapon ownership.

Zeth Demotokai was considered to have violated Law No 12/1951 on guns and is currently being detained at the Jayapura Police headquarters.

“He was named a suspect because he had projectiles, anti-tank rockets, four dumdum bullets and an AK rifle,” Papua Police spokesperson Sr. Comr. Pudjo Sulistyo said in Jayapura on Tuesday.

“The others are still being examined intensively.”

The 21 civilians were arrested after taking part in the inauguration of new members of the National Liberation Army for West Papua (TPN PB) headed by Terianus Sato, the group’s local leader.

15 August 1962 is a very important date for the political and social situation, human rights and democracy in the Land of Papua. It was on that day that an agreement was signed by the Indonesian Government and the Government of the Netherlands, under the auspices of the US Government. Dr Subandrio signed on behalf of the Indonesian Government and the Dutch government was represented by Mr J.H. Van Roijen and Mr C. Schumann. The agreement became known as the New York Agreement. Among other things, the Agreement laid down the procedures and mechanisms for the transfer of administrative powers in the Land of Papua from the Dutch Government to the United Nations represented by UNTEA - the United Nations Temporary Executive Authority.

The transfer of powers from UNTEA to the Indonesian Government on 1 May 1963 marked the beginning of the authority of the Indonesian Government over the Land of Papua. The Agreement also provided for the holding of an Act of Free Choice [known in Indonesian as PEPERA], a process that would been based on the principle of self-determination for the indigenous people of the Land of Papua. According to articles 16, 17 and 18 of the agreement, the voting would be held in accordance with universally recognised standards, that is to say 'one man one vote'. However, what actually happened was the use of the model used by the Indonesian Government in those days (1969), [the principle of consensus] which meant that for two months prior to the Act of FreeChoice conditions were 'sterilised' before the day when the voting was due to take place at military command posts in Merauke, Fakfak, Sorong, Manokwari, Biak, Nabire, Wamena and Jayapura. According to information obtained by the LP3BH, the people who were involved during that 'sterilised' period were warned to vote in favour of Indonesia or else their lives would be in danger. Apart from that, the Indonesian Army (TNI) conducted intelligence and security operations during which many young people, students and indigenous Papuans were arrested. Some people were killed or simply disappeared.

For instance, what happened in Manokwari on 28 July 1969 or one or two days beforehand was that approximately fifty civilians were summarily executed. Why is it that students and young people who came to the PEPERA office to express their aspirations were confronted by weapons, were maltreated till they were black and blue all over and were thrown on to police and army trucks and driven to army headquarters in Arfay where they were subjected to further acts of violence as a result of which many of them died? The New York Agreement is a document which always reminds us that as a result of that agreement, the first of a number of contracts were signed in 1967 between the Freeport Company and the Indonesian Government. The signing of the New York Agreement also marked the beginning of operations by the Indonesian army and police that have continued - in 1962, 1963, 1965 right up to 1970 and ever since, during which gross human rights violations have been perpetrated in violation of Article 7 of Law 26/2000 regarding Human Rights Courts in the Land of Papua.

This is why, in my opinion, the New York Agreement became the basis for a catastrophe which should be assessed in accordance with the law. Moreover, the United Nations should be urged to conduct an evaluation of the above-mentioned document. Has the New York Agreement led to welfare for the Indigenous Papuan people in their homeland or was it not the start of [line missing in the document we received]. In my opinion,there is surely the possibility for the New York Agreement signed on 15 August 1962 to be assessed in accordance with international law and taking account of the internal mechanisms of the United Nations.